London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham (202345959)
|
Decision |
|
|
Case ID |
202345959 |
|
Decision type |
Investigation |
|
Landlord |
London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham |
|
Landlord type |
Local Authority / ALMO or TMO |
|
Occupancy |
Secure Tenancy |
|
Date |
30 October 2025 |
Background
- The resident lives in a 2-bedroom flat with her young children. She reported persistent damp and mould in the property. She wants the landlord to permanently resolve the damp and mould issues.
What the complaint is about
- The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property.
- We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.
Our decision (determination)
- We have found that:
- There was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property.
- There was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handling.
We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.
Summary of reasons
The landlord’s handling of reports of damp and mould
- The landlord did not complete key damp and mould repairs identified in May 2023 within its policy time limits. It delayed inspecting the property and raising follow-on works, missing the targets in its damp and mould process. Its communication was poor and it failed to keep the resident updated on the status of her repairs, which caused avoidable distress and inconvenience. The damp and mould repairs remained outstanding when it issued its stage 2 complaint response and the compensation it offered did not fully reflect the impact of these failings.
The complaint handling
- The landlord provided its complaint response at both stages within the extended time limit of 10 additional working days at stage 1 and 20 additional working days at stage 2 of its complaints process. This was in line with its complaints policy and the Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (‘the Code’).
Putting things right
Where we find service failure, maladministration, or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.
Orders
Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.
|
Order |
What the landlord must do |
Due date |
|
1 |
Apology order
The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure:
|
No later than 27 November 2025 |
|
2 |
Compensation order
The landlord must pay the resident £650 total compensation broken down as follows:
This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date. |
No later than 27 November 2025 |
|
3 |
Inspection order
The landlord must arrange a further damp and mould inspection.
It should prepare an action plan detailing any identified works, target timescales for completion, and how it will ensure it permanently resolves the issue.
The landlord must share a copy of both the inspection report and the action plan with the resident and us by the due date.
|
No later than 27 November 2025 |
Recommendations
Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.
|
Our recommendations |
|
If it has not already done so, it is recommended that the landlord pay to the resident the £50 it offered in its stage 2 complaint response in respect of its complaint handling. |
Our investigation
The complaint procedure
|
Date |
What happened |
|
26 May 2023 |
The landlord’s contractor completed a damp and mould inspection. It recommended installing an extractor fan in the bathroom and replacing an undersized radiator in one of the bedrooms. |
|
5 January 2024 |
The resident made a formal complaint about recurring damp and mould in the property, along with other issues. She said the landlord had previously inspected the property but had not followed up regarding proposed repairs to the bathroom extractor fan and a bedroom radiator. She asked the landlord to resolve all outstanding issues, including the damp and mould. |
|
8 and 22 January 2024 |
The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 8 January 2024. It requested a stage 1 complaint response extension on 22 January 2024. |
|
2 February 2024 |
The landlord issued it stage 1 complaint response, apologising for the delay in replying and for the repair issues. It said it had resolved the radiator issue. It confirmed that its specialist damp and mould surveyors would attend the property. It offered £200 compensation broken down as £175 for delays in completing repairs (including damp and mould repairs) and £25 for complaint handling delay. |
|
2 February 2024 |
The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s response and asked to escalate her complaint. She explained that the landlord had not repaired the radiator and there were severe damp and condensation in the property. |
|
23 February 2024 |
The landlord’s surveyor attended the property. They confirmed damp and mould were still present and recommended further remedial works. |
|
29 February 2024 |
The landlord wrote to the resident to extend its response timescale. It said it would respond by 12 March 2024. |
|
12 March 2024 |
The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It apologised for the delay in completing the damp and mould works and other repairs. It acknowledged that it had not yet completed the damp and mould repairs. It said its complaints monitoring team would contact the resident within 5 working days and would see her repairs through to a post inspection of all works completed. It offered an additional £200 compensation broken down as £175 for distress and inconvenience caused by the delay in completing outstanding repairs (including damp and mould) and £25 for the delay in responding to the resident’s complaint. This brought the total compensation offered across both complaint stages to £400. |
|
Referral to the Ombudsman |
The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s complaint response and she asked us to investigate. She said the landlord only completes temporary fixes and the damp and mould continue to reoccur in the property. She wants the landlord to permanently resolve the damp and mould issue and offer increased compensation. |
What we found and why
The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.
|
Complaint |
The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property. |
|
Finding |
Maladministration |
What we did not consider
- The resident told the landlord she has been reporting damp and mould in the property between 2018 to 2022. We do not investigate complaints that a resident did not raise with the landlord within a reasonable period. So, we have only considered the landlord’s actions in relation to the reports of damp and mould during the 12 months leading up to the resident raising the complaint until its stage 2 complaint response.
- The resident told us that the landlord’s handling of her reports of damp and mould had a detrimental impact on her and her children’s health. It would be fairer, more reasonable, and more effective for the resident to make a personal injury claim for any injury caused. The courts are best placed to deal with this type of dispute as they will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any injury and how long it will last. We have not investigated this further. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for distress and inconvenience.
- The resident also complained about window and drainage repairs. She told us that the landlord has since resolved these issues to her satisfaction. Therefore, we have not considered these matters as part of this investigation. Any reference to them in this report is provided for background context only.
The resident’s reports of damp and mould
- The landlord’s record shows that on 26 May 2023 its contractors completed a damp and mould inspection at the property. Its contractors completed mould treatments and identified that an extractor fan and a larger radiator were required in the bathroom and bedroom respectively. According to the landlord’s repairs policy, it will complete routine repairs within 20 working days and planned repairs within 60 working days.
- The radiator and extractor fan works remained outstanding when the resident made her complaint on 5 January 2024. This was more than 7 months after the landlord’s contractors identified the required repairs and around 69 working days beyond the landlord’s planned repairs time limit of 60 working days. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the landlord explained the reason for this delay or kept the resident updated on when it would complete these works. This delay and lack of communication was unreasonable and likely caused inconvenience to the resident.
- In her stage 1 complaint, the resident reported ongoing damp and mould in the property. The landlord’s damp and mould process say it must complete a survey within 20 working days of a report and complete follow-on works within the appropriate repair time limit. In its stage 1 complaint response on 2 February 2024 the landlord appropriately said it would arrange a damp and mould inspection. However, the inspection did not take place until 23 February 2024 around 7 weeks after the resident reported damp and mould on 5 January 2024. This delay was not in line with the 20-working days target in the landlord’s damp and mould process and was therefore a failing.
- The landlord did not clearly explain the reasons for the inspection delay or keep the resident updated. It would have been reasonable for the landlord to prioritise these works given the extent of damp and mould reported, and the length of time the resident had been affected.
- In the same response, the landlord incorrectly stated that it had resolved the radiator issue. Its records show this was not the case. The landlord also did not confirm whether it had replaced the extractor fan in the bathroom. This created confusion and likely undermined the resident’s confidence in the landlord’s communication about the status of the repairs.
- The damp and mould inspection on 23 February 2024 confirmed that damp and mould remained present in the property. The surveyor recommended further remedial works, including completing damp and mould treatments to the affected areas.
- At the time of the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response, the radiator and extractor fan repair had been outstanding since 26 May 2023, when the contractor first recommended these works. The landlord’s records do not show that it had completed the radiator or extractor fan works. This was more than 9 months after the initial recommendation and significantly outside the landlord’s 60 working–days’ time limit for planned repairs. The landlord also confirmed that it had not completed the required damp and mould works by the time of its stage 2 complaint response.
- Where there are admitted failings by a landlord, we will consider whether the redress offered put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, we take into account whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles; be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes. Although the landlord apologised, offered some compensation, and promised to contact the resident in 5 working days, these actions did not amount to reasonable redress. The £350 compensation it offered also related to other repair issues and not solely to delays in resolving the damp and mould.
- While the landlord acknowledged in its stage 2 complaint response that it needed to improve communication between its teams, it did not demonstrate that it had implemented this learning during the complaint period. Its records do not show that it followed through on its commitment to update the resident within 5 working days or that it completed the identified repairs within its repair’s time limit. The resident continued to report damp and mould afterwards, indicating the actions taken were insufficient to resolve the matter at that time.
- On that basis, and as the issues remained unresolved, we find that there has been maladministration.
- We consider an order for the landlord to pay the resident an additional £300 compensation (inclusive of the landlord’s original offer) to be appropriate. This amount reflects the distress and inconvenience the resident experienced and is consistent with the landlord’s compensation policy, which states that awards should consider the extent, severity, and impact of the failure. It also aligns with our remedies guidance for cases where there was a failure which adversely affected the resident and the landlord has made some attempt to put things right.
|
Complaint |
The handling of the complaint |
|
Finding |
No maladministration |
- The landlord’s complaints policy states that it will issue a stage 1 complaint response within 10 working days, with an extension of up to a further 10 working days in complex cases. At stage 2, it will respond within 20 working days and may extend this by up to an additional 20 working days where further investigation is needed. These time limits are consistent with the Code, which allows similar extensions where necessary and communicated to the resident.
- The resident made her formal complaint on 5 January 2024. The landlord requested for an extension on 22 January 2024 and issued its stage 1 response on 2 February 2024 within the extended time limit allowed by its policy and the Code. The resident escalated her complaint on 2 February 2024. The landlord requested an extension for its stage 2 response on 29 February 2024 and issued the response on 12 March 2024, within the permitted 40 day extended time limit. In both responses, the landlord appropriately explained the reasons for its extension request and provided updates. It apologised for the need to extend its response time and extension and offered £25 at both stage 1 and stage 2 of its complaints process to acknowledge the additional time taken. This was reasonable.
- In summary, the landlord responded within the extended time limit set out in its policy, appropriately communicated its extension request, and acknowledged this through an apology and small goodwill payment. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s complaint handing.
Learning
- In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord said it had identified the need to improve communication between its repairs and complaints teams to ensure consistent updates to residents. This was an appropriate acknowledgement of learning. The landlord should ensure that these lessons are embedded in practice and monitored for effectiveness.
Knowledge information management (record keeping)
- The landlord’s records show inconsistencies in how it tracked and updated the status of repairs. Its internal correspondence contained conflicting information about whether it had replaced the radiator or completed the extractor fan works. Accurate and consistent record keeping is essential to ensure repairs are monitored, completed within target timescales, and communicated clearly to residents. The landlord should review its record-keeping practises to ensure staff maintain clear and up to date repair histories, particularly where multiple teams or contractors are involved.
Communication
- The landlord did not consistently keep the resident informed about the progress of her repairs or clarify the status of the outstanding works. The landlord should ensure that residents receive accurate and timely updates about their repairs, particularly when there are delays or changes to planned works.